Majority
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), dated August 10, 2011, as, upon renewal, in effect, vacated its prior order dated May 19, 2011, which denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident, and thereupon granted the defendants’ motion.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
We agree with the Supreme Court’s determination, upon re
In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The plaintiff relied on the medical report of her treating radiologist, Dr. Linda Harkavy, based on an examination. This report, while in admissible form, merely revealed the existence of a disc bulge at L3-4, and a “tiny . . . disc protrusion” at L4-L5. The mere existence of a bulging disc, in the absence of objective evidence as to the extent of the alleged physical limitations resulting from that injury and their duration, is not evidence of serious injury (see Scheker v Brown, 91 AD3d 751 , 752 [2012]).
Accordingly, upon renewal, the Supreme Court properly, in effect, vacated its prior order dated May 19, 2011, denying the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and thereupon properly granted the motion. Skelos, J.E, Dickerson, Hall, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Toure v. Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. 98 NY2d 345 p. 1011
- DeJesus v. Paulino 61 AD3d 605 at 607 p. 1011
- Staff v. Yshua 59 AD3d 614 p. 1011
- Scheker v. Brown 91 AD3d 751 at 752 p. 1011